Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - Courts Administration Service

Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.





2007-08
Departmental Performance Report



Courts Administration Service






Supplementary Information (Tables)






Table of Contents




Table 3: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue

Non-Respendable Revenue


($ millions) Actual
2005-20061
Actual
2006-20072
2007-2008
Planned Revenue3 Planned Actual
Provide Registry Services
Refund of previous years' expenditures 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1
Services fees 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.8
Court fines 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7
Miscellaneous non-tax revenues 3.2 2.7 3.2 2.6
Total Non-Respendable Revenue 5.0 4.5 4.8 8.1

Notes:

  1. Source 2005-06 DPR.
  2. Source 2006-07 DPR.
  3. Source 2007-08 RPP.
  4. At the Courts Administration Service, non respendable revenues consist primarily of fees levied for filing documents within the registries, for sales of photocopies of judgments and other revenues such as fines. CAS has no control over court fines, as they are imposed by judicial officers. Predicting these fines is entirely dependent on the cases being brought before the judiciary.
  5. Miscellaneous non-tax revenues consist primarily of other revenues, but are primarily derived from the Employment Insurance (EI) account. The total cost allocated by the Courts Administration Service (CAS) for handling EI cases is expended against the Employment Insurance account of Canada. As such, HRSDC, the department responsible for the EI account, shows an EI expense and CAS shows an equivalent, non-respendable revenue item. The purpose of this accounting exercise is to more accurately reflect the total cost of running the federal government's EI program and it is strictly internal to the government.
  6. Numbers in columns may not add up due to rounding.


Table 4: Details on Project Spending

(in $ millions)


Current Estimated Total Cost Actual
2005-2006
Actual
2006-2007
2007-2008
Main Estimates Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual
Corporate Services
Lorne Building Project1 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 0.1
Case Management System2 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 0.2

Notes:

  1. The Lorne relocation project consists of the complete retrofit of the 4th, 5th and 6th floor in the Thomas D'Arcy McGee building. This fit-up allow 160 employees to be relocated from the Lorne building to the TDM building. All project costs including the in house purchases have been budgeted in the 1.6 million allocated to the project.
  2. The Case Management System provides access to all information necessary by the registries of the courts. It is a web based computer system that follows the rules of the courts and allows the cases of each court to be implemented effectively. The scope and definition of this project has evolved over the past year to be clearly associated with case management only.
  3. All costs include Employee Benefit Plans.


Table 5: Response to Parliamentary Committees and External Audits


Response to Parliamentary Committees
Not applicable


Response to the Auditor General (including to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development)
2007 October Report of the Auditor General of Canada – Chapter 2 – Management and Control Practices in Three Small Entities

The Auditor General of Canada found that the Courts Administration Service has effective control procedures in place for acquisition cards, executive travel, and hospitality. However, its controls for contracting and its management of performance pay lack rigour. It also has difficulty finding enough people with the required skills and competencies to fill its positions on a timely basis. A significant number of its employees have been in acting positions for up to two years. Yet the Courts Administration Service has done virtually no planning to address these problems.

Courts Administration Service's response –

In 2006, the Service established a Contracts Review Committee to review contracts and their files on a quarterly basis in order to ensure that they comply with the Government Contracts Regulations, the Treasury Board Contracting Policy, and CAS internal policies and procedures. In 2005, the Service also established and staffed a senior contracting specialist position to ensure that controls were applied rigorously.

As a result of an earlier internal audit of human resources management, the Service has accessed approximately $933,000 in funding from the Canada Public Service Agency's strategic investment framework for six initiatives under the Public Service Modernization Act. A key initiative being funded is the development of a human resources plan across the organization. The Service is currently working with a consultant to develop an action plan, and in the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 fiscal years, the Service will be putting this plan into action. A key component of the action plan will be the provision of training and tools to senior management in order to ensure the sustainability of the process.

The recommendation that the Service should ensure performance pay awards are based on complete performance assessments was also made in an earlier internal audit of human resources management. As a result, the Service now ensures compliance with the Performance Management Program of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and our own internal policies through the monitoring and annual report of the Performance Review Committee. To ensure awareness, all executives provide a written attestation of their compliance with policy.

Link to the 2007 October Report of the Auditor General of Canada – Chapter 2 – Management and Control Practices in Three Small Entities http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_200710_02_e_23826.html



External Audits (Note: These refer to other external audits conducted by the Public Service Commission of Canada or the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages)
Staffing Management Accountability Framework for 2007-2008

Courts Administration Service was assessed against the Staffing Management Accountability Framework eleven leading indicators of long-term success for the reporting period April 2007 to March 2008. The organization received an acceptable rating for four of these leading indicators, i.e. delegation, merit, non-partisanship and fairness. An area of strength identified overall was in relation to the values of transparency and access in the manner in which employees of the organization are notified about staffing advertisements and notifications. In the seven remaining areas, i.e. Human Resources Planning, Human Resources Support Systems, Accountability for Results, Flexibility and Efficiency, Representativeness, Access and Transparency, the organization received a rating of "opportunity for improvement". Feedback from the Public Service Commission indicated that corporate-level and sector human resources plans and staffing strategies need to have department-wide staffing objectives expressed in measurable terms and variances from comparisons of actual to planned staffing activities documented and reported to senior management and actively addressed. The length of appointment processes, employment equity provisions in the internal and external advertised processes, the ratio of non-advertised appointments to total appointments and the under-representation of women also needs to be addressed in the HR Plans in measurable terms. HR plans and staffing strategies also need to be communicated to employees and managers. It was also indicated that a continuous learning curriculum for staffing advisors needs to be developed and the staffing services and infrastructure needs to fully meet management's assessment of overall needs.

The organization is presently working on a three year integrated business and HR plan and staffing strategies which will be finalized in the early fall of 2008. The HR Plan and staffing strategies will also be posted at this time on the organization's intranet site. The HR Plan will address the length of appointment processes, employment equity provisions, the ratio of non-advertised appointments to total appointments, and the under-representation of women in measurable terms. In relation to continuous learning curriculum for staffing advisors, the organization has developed learning plans and a coach is in place to train and develop employees in staffing.




Table 6: Internal Audits and Evaluations

Internal Audits (current reporting period)


Name of Internal Audit Audit Type Status Completion Date Electronic Link to Report
N/A *

*No internal audit was conducted during the period between March 2007 and April 2008.

Evaluations (current reporting period)


Name of Evaluation Program Activity Evaluation Type Status Completion Date Electronic Link to Report
N/A *

*No evaluation was conducted during the period between March 2007 and April 2008.



Table 7: Travel Policies


Comparison to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Special Travel Authorities
Courts Administration Service follows the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Special Travel Authorities.


Comparison to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Travel Directive, Rates and Allowances
Courts Administration Service follows the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Travel Directive, Rates and Allowances.